Turn Off Ads?
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 84

Thread: How about Hamilton for Hill?

  1. #16
    One and a half men Patrick Bateman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Posts
    5,876

    Re: How about Hamilton for Hill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Benihana View Post
    I wouldn't. But I would think the Cubs would be more interested in Griffey than Hamilton. They are going for it this year, so the age is irrelevant. Also, they appear to be willing to spend to the sky, so the money is irrelevant. The Cubs have been interested in Griffey in the past, whereas they exhibited how much interest they had in Hamilton by selling him to the Reds for less than one of Griffey's gamechecks.

    Not completely irrelevant. They may be trying to win now, but they also want to win in the next few seasons too since they appear to have the required talent (and cash) to stick around for a few years.

    My guess is that they would be happy to take Griffey's salary off our hands, but not throw in Hill too. He's their 2nd best pitcher. They aren't going to trade him for a 1 year risk.

    I would bet the house that every single team in baseball would take Hamilton before Griffey. They both have their injury concerns, but Griffey's are worse. And it's arguable who the better hitter is right now. Factoring in defense, I'd take Hamilton straight up while ignoring age and salary.

    The proposed Griffey for Hill is living in a dream world. Hamilton for Hill would be opn to debate, but with the pitching market way out of whack, Hill has more value, by quite a bit.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #17
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,659

    Re: How about Hamilton for Hill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Falls City Beer View Post
    With the Reds' current defense and its very homer friendly environs, you ought to be worried about a guy like Hill. I'll wager he'd surrender 40 a year in GAB, with regularity.

    I'd trade for him, but not Hamilton. I'll wager that Belisle will put up numbers similar to Hill's next year.
    I didn't check out your assertion initially, but ESPN shows Wrigley as the second most hitter friendly park in the league, with HRs being a 115 (GAB is 135), which is easily in the top third of parks for HRs. As a means of comparison, the Wrigley overall park factor for runs is 117 while GAB is 109. So, while he may give up a few more homers, all things equal, I'd be expected the low 30s. I'd say this is a wart I could deal with.
    http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor


    As for the lofty expectations for Belisle, that would be awesome if he matches Hill's numbers, but I would have to give you odds to make it a fair bet. Hill has two solid seasons under his belt of well above league average ERA in a hitter's park, Belisle has, well, none. And I like Belisle's potential, but his performance may never live up to it (pitch backwards, Matt).
    Last edited by traderumor; 11-29-2007 at 03:12 PM.

  4. #18
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,864

    Re: How about Hamilton for Hill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Benihana View Post
    I wouldn't. But I would think the Cubs would be more interested in Griffey than Hamilton. They are going for it this year, so the age is irrelevant. Also, they appear to be willing to spend to the sky, so the money is irrelevant. The Cubs have been interested in Griffey in the past, whereas they exhibited how much interest they had in Hamilton by selling him to the Reds for less than one of Griffey's gamechecks.
    I don't think there is a GM on the planet that would choose Jr over Hamilton at this point.

    Anyway, if it's a no brainer from your favorite team's standpoint, its probably a no brainer that the proposed trading partner turns it down too.
    Last edited by jojo; 11-29-2007 at 03:13 PM.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  5. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    9,845

    Re: How about Hamilton for Hill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Austin Kearns View Post
    Not completely irrelevant. They may be trying to win now, but they also want to win in the next few seasons too since they appear to have the required talent (and cash) to stick around for a few years.

    My guess is that they would be happy to take Griffey's salary off our hands, but not throw in Hill too. He's their 2nd best pitcher. They aren't going to trade him for a 1 year risk.

    I would bet the house that every single team in baseball would take Hamilton before Griffey. They both have their injury concerns, but Griffey's are worse. And it's arguable who the better hitter is right now. Factoring in defense, I'd take Hamilton straight up while ignoring age and salary.

    The proposed Griffey for Hill is living in a dream world. Hamilton for Hill would be opn to debate, but with the pitching market way out of whack, Hill has more value, by quite a bit.
    You're probably right, but I was just noting that the Cubs are one of the few teams that where a trade of Griffey could work. And I would do everything that I could (which may even include trading Cueto) to ensure we could keep Hamilton and move Griffey in a deal for Rich Hill, mainly for all of the reasons that you stated.
    Go BLUE!!!

  6. #20
    Redsmetz redsmetz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Winton Place
    Posts
    11,165

    Re: How about Hamilton for Hill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Benihana View Post
    Well I like Belisle too, but the point is if you're the Reds, you need two Belisles instead of one. If we could get Rich Hill for Griffey and any prospect other than the big four, its a huge coup IMO.
    Someone asked about whether I'd do Griffey and Belisle or Cueto (I think), but I'd lean more towards this, plus I'd do less cash. I figure the cash in would be the added sweetener.
    ďIn the same way that a baseball season never really begins, it never really ends either.Ē - Lonnie Wheeler, "Bleachers, A Summer in Wrigley Field"

    The Baseball Emporium - Books & Things, that's Rallyonion.com

    The Baseball Bookstore

    http://tsc-sales.com/
    http://tscsales.blogspot.com/
    http://silverscreenbooks.com/

  7. #21
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,864

    Re: How about Hamilton for Hill?

    Quote Originally Posted by redsmetz View Post
    Someone asked about whether I'd do Griffey and Belisle or Cueto (I think), but I'd lean more towards this, plus I'd do less cash. I figure the cash in would be the added sweetener.
    Isn't proposing to throw cash in on a deal to a team that apparently doesn't care about payroll kind of like arguing a healthy individual would prefer a pie that was baked using Sucaryl rather than sugar?
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  8. #22
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,276

    Re: How about Hamilton for Hill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Benihana View Post
    I wouldn't. But I would think the Cubs would be more interested in Griffey than Hamilton. They are going for it this year, so the age is irrelevant. Also, they appear to be willing to spend to the sky, so the money is irrelevant. The Cubs have been interested in Griffey in the past, whereas they exhibited how much interest they had in Hamilton by selling him to the Reds for less than one of Griffey's gamechecks.
    Except thats not how it works. The Cubs didn't pick Hamilton then sell him to the Reds. The Reds said 'we will pay you this amount of money to make a pick for us' and the Cubs agreed. Then the Reds got the paperwork signed, then we tell them who to take. Its not as if the Cubs drafted him then didn't like him and decided to move him.

  9. #23
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,160

    Re: How about Hamilton for Hill?

    Quote Originally Posted by redsmetz View Post
    I'd do Griffey for Hill and maybe throw in some cash too. Griffey might have interest in finishing up with Lou and he'd crank a few more when the wind is blowing out.
    That's the deal I'd be trying to work as well. Jr.'s star power and history with Lou might actually make the Cubs more interested in him than Hamilton. Might not, but the Cubs peculiar motivations might favor Jr.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  10. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    9,845

    Re: How about Hamilton for Hill?

    Quote Originally Posted by M2 View Post
    That's the deal I'd be trying to work as well. Jr.'s star power and history with Lou might actually make the Cubs more interested in him than Hamilton. Might not, but the Cubs peculiar motivations might favor Jr.
    That's exactly what I was suggesting. Money isn't the Reds' primary concern for the first time in a long time. So offer Griffey and cash for Hill, and throw in Maloney, Roenicke or whoever you need to in order to get the deal done. The irony is the Reds have the cash but there's no talent available on the market. Times like this require creative thinking in order to get your desired results.
    Last edited by Benihana; 11-29-2007 at 03:34 PM.
    Go BLUE!!!

  11. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    9,845

    Re: How about Hamilton for Hill?

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    Except thats not how it works. The Cubs didn't pick Hamilton then sell him to the Reds. The Reds said 'we will pay you this amount of money to make a pick for us' and the Cubs agreed. Then the Reds got the paperwork signed, then we tell them who to take. Its not as if the Cubs drafted him then didn't like him and decided to move him.
    That's all well and good, but it doesn't change the fact that the Cubs had a free and clear shot to grab Hamilton for nothing, and passed. It's not like it was an oversight.
    Go BLUE!!!

  12. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    9,845

    Re: How about Hamilton for Hill?

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    I don't think there is a GM on the planet that would choose Jr over Hamilton at this point.

    Anyway, if it's a no brainer from your favorite team's standpoint, its probably a no brainer that the proposed trading partner turns it down too.
    Thanks for the wise words, jojo. I've lived in Chicago for the past five years, I'd say I'm more aware than the average Reds fan of what the Cubs are looking for.

    The Cubs would love to trade Rich Hill for Carl Crawford. If the Reds could figure out a way to replicate Crawford's value though the Cubs eyes we might be able to work something out.

    As I pointed out, and M2 seems to agree, the Cubs may have a unique interest in Ken Griffey, Jr.
    Go BLUE!!!

  13. #27
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,864

    Re: How about Hamilton for Hill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Benihana View Post
    Thanks for the wise words, jojo. I've lived in Chicago for the past five years, I'd say I'm more aware than the average Reds fan of what the Cubs are looking for.

    The Cubs would love to trade Rich Hill for Carl Crawford. If the Reds could figure out a way to replicate Crawford's value though the Cubs eyes we might be able to work something out.

    As I pointed out, and M2 seems to agree, the Cubs may have a unique interest in Ken Griffey, Jr.
    *snark alert*

    You're welcome but don't overestimate my wisdom-I grew up in Chicago and I'm at a loss as to how the Cubs love for Crawford would translate into them trading a major chip for Jr...

    *snark alert expired*
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  14. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Lexington
    Posts
    5,868

    Re: How about Hamilton for Hill?

    I'd send them Griffey, Belisle and Majewski - doubt the Scrubs would do it though.

  15. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    9,845

    Re: How about Hamilton for Hill?

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    *snark alert*

    You're welcome but don't overestimate my wisdom-I grew up in Chicago and I'm at a loss as to how the Cubs love for Crawford would translate into them trading a major chip for Jr...

    *snark alert expired*
    Snark alert or no, I suggested that the Cubs *might* be willing to take Griffey and something else in exchange for Rich Hill, (who is their #3 starter and not their #2 as someone earlier suggested.) They also *might* be willing to trade Hill for Hamilton and something else. I suggested that they'd probably ask for Belisle as part of that deal. Either way, neither you nor I know what the Cubs would take for Hill for sure, and that's all there is to it.
    Go BLUE!!!

  16. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    9,845

    Re: How about Hamilton for Hill?

    .
    Go BLUE!!!


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25